Not a bad idea, but it would be also good to be able to press a button which gives the whole board to one player and spells out all the objectives and bonuses (with their values). Then add a way of changing the ownership of a region/territory so the user can break zones and objectives and rebuild them for some other player, so you can check progressive bonuses, like hold two of four for +1, three of four for +2, and so on. As far as display goes, I'm thinking of stuff like BOB's Continent Overview and Objective Summary. The ability to hover over these things and highlight the pertinent areas on the map would be excellent.

Not a bad idea, but it would be also good to be able to press a button which gives the whole board to one player and spells out all the objectives and bonuses (with their values). Then add a way of changing the ownership of a region/territory so the user can break zones and objectives and rebuild them for some other player, so you can check progressive bonuses, like hold two of four for +1, three of four for +2, and so on. As far as display goes, I'm thinking of stuff like BOB's Continent Overview and Objective Summary. The ability to hover over these things and highlight the pertinent areas on the map would be excellent.

You can already hover on continents/objectives/start positions to see the territories highlighted.Do you mean after the test drop? Yes I'm doing that. (Actually done, just testing now).

I can add what you want simply by allowing 1 player to the test drop and do a special case.

I think If I publish what I've done then might be easier, as I'm not sure what you are gunning for regarding method of changing ownership.

Ok published. You can now test initial automatic troop drop. I have modified head post to include detail but it is straightforward.

Basically choose number of players, press Test Drop and the whole map lights up in player colours.The drop is random so you can keep pressing Test drop to see what could happen in a real game.All calculations are automatically done including starting positions, starting neutrals, required and overrides.(Those last 2 are for the map inspect colouring)Map inspect is coloured accordingly as you would expect to see. Hover over territory names or continent names or objective names too.In the continents tab all territories are coloured. In addition if continents are held by one player the left cell is highlighted in thatcolour to make it easy to see.

Added new error check

Error: Reinforcements defined with no Minimum Reinforcements

This is the first stage for drop testing, plenty more to come, but this will help for sure.

Not an error - could be a warning... without the minimum you get the default 3.

C.

Yeah realised when I was coding some new stuff for the tool.

The XML Tutorial says

"The minimum reinforcement must be a number greater than zero."

but it perhaps should say it is not mandatory with reinforcement tags because both examples have it together with reinforcement tags.This makes it look like you need minimum reinforcement if you are using reinforcement tags.

Too much info to type all over again, I have modified head post so please read.

Basically you can play a game simulation on your map following your xml rules so you can better test the XML.I have outlined some ideas for how to use it to test a selection of xml tags.

If you want to try everything out straight away, load an existing CC map (input both images or even one and the xml)

I will try and do something about maps with large widths next as per natty_dread's request.

Oh, chipv, you are rocking the house! This is a tremendous upgrade, making XML checks a breeze. My only quibble is gaining an objective ends the game immediately, rather than at the start of the turn of the player holding the objective. The only way I see this being much of a problem would be if one wanted to check if holding the objective had the appropriate effect of limiting bonuses received by other players taking their turns before the play came back to the one holding the objective.

Too much info to type all over again, I have modified head post so please read.

Basically you can play a game simulation on your map following your xml rules so you can better test the XML.I have outlined some ideas for how to use it to test a selection of xml tags.

If you want to try everything out straight away, load an existing CC map (input both images or even one and the xml)

I will try and do something about maps with large widths next as per natty_dread's request.

Oh, chipv, you are rocking the house! This is a tremendous upgrade, making XML checks a breeze. My only quibble is gaining an objective ends the game immediately, rather than at the start of the turn of the player holding the objective. The only way I see this being much of a problem would be if one wanted to check if holding the objective had the appropriate effect of limiting bonuses received by other players taking their turns before the play came back to the one holding the objective.

Ah good spot, bug there will fix shortly, thanks very much for feedback again!

Too much info to type all over again, I have modified head post so please read.

Basically you can play a game simulation on your map following your xml rules so you can better test the XML.I have outlined some ideas for how to use it to test a selection of xml tags.

If you want to try everything out straight away, load an existing CC map (input both images or even one and the xml)

I will try and do something about maps with large widths next as per natty_dread's request.

Oh, chipv, you are rocking the house! This is a tremendous upgrade, making XML checks a breeze. My only quibble is gaining an objective ends the game immediately, rather than at the start of the turn of the player holding the objective. The only way I see this being much of a problem would be if one wanted to check if holding the objective had the appropriate effect of limiting bonuses received by other players taking their turns before the play came back to the one holding the objective.

I can't seem to get the gameplay testing / play simulation to work... I press play but all that happens is that 1 territory for each player turns into different colours. How do I attack, bombard etc. ?

Only the territories of 1 continent turn to different colours though...

I did have some hanging hovers though - not sure why... couldn't reproduce it either - probably an event not firing properly - stupid browser.

C.

Yeah, well I'm not getting the gameplay work at all. The way I understand it from the introduction in this thread I should be able to simulate a whole game with "players" playing their "turns"... I press play but all it does is change colours of a few territories. And then if I try to click the territories it just goes to territory edit mode. It's not supposed to be like this right?

I did have some hanging hovers though - not sure why... couldn't reproduce it either - probably an event not firing properly - stupid browser.

C.

Yeah, well I'm not getting the gameplay work at all. The way I understand it from the introduction in this thread I should be able to simulate a whole game with "players" playing their "turns"... I press play but all it does is change colours of a few territories. And then if I try to click the territories it just goes to territory edit mode. It's not supposed to be like this right?

Btw noticed another bug: in the window where it shows the player names and whose turn it is, and who gets what bonuses and autodeploys, all autodeploys show as +0 even though the players are getting autodeploys according to game log...

natty_dread wrote:Btw noticed another bug: in the window where it shows the player names and whose turn it is, and who gets what bonuses and autodeploys, all autodeploys show as +0 even though the players are getting autodeploys according to game log...

Fixed. Sorry, this probably ruins your first impression, but at least the tool is being given a proper workout.

Hopefully once bug-free, will be considered useful, thanks for your feedback, keep it coming.

chipv wrote:Fixed. Sorry, this probably ruins your first impression, but at least the tool is being given a proper workout.

Not at all, really. In fact I was just ranting in my map thread how useful this is for working out flaws in the gameplay! (now if you can make a version with accurate deployments and dice throws so that you could really simulate a game 100% through... that'd be awesome! but I might be asking for too much here...) Anyway this system also works well, at least you can get an estimate of how a game might possibly be played on your current map rules.

chipv wrote:Fixed. Sorry, this probably ruins your first impression, but at least the tool is being given a proper workout.

Not at all, really. In fact I was just ranting in my map thread how useful this is for working out flaws in the gameplay! (now if you can make a version with accurate deployments and dice throws so that you could really simulate a game 100% through... that'd be awesome! but I might be asking for too much here...) Anyway this system also works well, at least you can get an estimate of how a game might possibly be played on your current map rules.

Keep up the good work!

I was going to do that, then someone convinced me this would be nothing more than a gimmick so stopped short.(Someone else also suggested bots to play with, same thing there).

I was going to do that, then someone convinced me this would be nothing more than a gimmick so stopped short.

Don't listen to him! It'd be hugely useful: every time when you're not sure if your gameplay would work in practice, you'd just update the XML and run a few games on the XML wizard, and then you'd know for sure!

Bots to play with would also be fun, and it would also be kinda useful (less work in running simulations, don't need to play all players' turns yourself) but even just the first part would be immensely helpful.

Of course, if I am the only mapmaker that sees things this way, then you don't need to go doing a huge amount of work just for me... (although it would be nice )

Chipv, i'm just sarting to get a taste for this tool...working on Cricket (even though LV will be doing this xml)

It is wildly useful, but it's also challenging and requires reading the instructions a lot -> therefore not friendly for those like me who like to "jump in". However...i can see the logic behind it...You have the window divided into two sections now....left fo map and right for input.

Would it be possible to use the bottom frame of the page to generate the xml, so that we can see each step as we add it, to know what we have done is correct.For me, without this is, it's like writing in the dark. i like to be able to see what is being generated automatically.Also, for the text that is generated, there are no indents. Is this possible to add?

Oh, and another small thing: when territory or continent names have non-standard characters, like ä, ö and such, that require to be coded with &-codes in the XML, they are not however... They appear in the XML as they are. Could it be made so that they automatically get encoded into those &xxx codes?

(also when you load an XML file, and it has special characters, they show up as those weird blocks with hex numbers in the XML wizard).

natty_dread wrote:Oh, and another small thing: when territory or continent names have non-standard characters, like ä, ö and such, that require to be coded with &-codes in the XML, they are not however... They appear in the XML as they are. Could it be made so that they automatically get encoded into those &xxx codes?

(also when you load an XML file, and it has special characters, they show up as those weird blocks with hex numbers in the XML wizard).